because I think it’s only a game, … a self-image I adopt in virtual space, … I can enact there an identity which is much closer to my true self.

We need the excuse of a fiction to stage what we truly are.

s. zizek

Advertisements

there is no “true reality” behind or beneath phenomena; noumena are phenomenal things which are “too strong,” too intense or intensive, for our perceptual apparatus, attuned as it is to constituted reality.

Deleuze’s point is … that one should subtract the opposition between phenomena and things-in-themselves, between the phenomenal and the noumenal, from its Kantian context, where noumena are transcendent things that forever elude our grasp.

What Deleuze refers to as “things-in-themselves” are in a way even more phenomenal than our shared phenomenal reality: they are the impossible phenomena, the phenomena excluded from our symbolically constituted reality.

s. zizek

Men are in the position of semblants. J.-A. Miller goes on to define a semblant as that which veils the nothing and thereby creates it as absent. Knowing that the phallus is a semblant, this may start to make sense. In his paper, Miller concludes his elaboration on the feminine semblants of having and being by opposing phallic jouissance—the jouissance of the owner—to the without-limit of the feminine. This seems to point in the direction of the debate surrounding the end of analysis and the pass, for where a masculine solution seems to involve an identification with the symptom—a solution favored by Lacan in his Seminar XXIV—and thus, in the last analysis, with a meaningless inscription of jouissance, a feminine solution seems to imply a different relation to lack, accepting the absence of unification, or one-ification, under the auspices of the signifier.

“The Later Lacan”